– is, in fact, the recognition of the failure of the economic model of President and his administration? ED: I think the Western countries have gone too far in its quest for energy security by any means and the actual loss is another area of influence in post-Soviet space – an obvious confirmation of this. Corr.: So sharp change of sentiment in the eu summit, despite assurances from Mrs. Ashton, still motivated by cost? ED: If you do not mind, I remind you the words Gilmara Enke, a representative of E. on Ruhrgas ag in Ukraine, who recently stated that, despite the clear advantages of energy supply with the Ukrainian gas transport system, there are many factors that adversely affect the prospects of Ukraine as a transit country Russian gas in this market. Mr Encke then added that if miss the chance and time in this situation, it could lead to irreparable consequences. Of course, first of all, he had in mind the consequences for Europe itself.
In view of the uncertain prospects for the modernization of Ukrainian pipelines, and in the absence of a productive dialogue between the European Union, Ukraine and Russia and the eu over the last year actively engaged in seeking alternative sources power supply in accordance with its own directive on security of energy supplies. It is reasonable to assume that one of the factors mentioned by Mr Encke, was the political instability in Ukraine, broadest sense, including the volatility in the agreements on the transit of strategic resources. Corr.: Frustrated Europe gave the nod to the change of power since lost hope of achieving the status quo in any other way? ED: Actually, the eu is much more concerned about the diversification of energy sources than the election results, even in such strategically important neighboring countries like Ukraine. Mrs. Ashton Law. The eu, in this case, no mixes economics with politics, simply because there is no policy – is the economy and responding to economic problems.
Threats, such as those encountered freezing Europe last winter, can dramatically change the vector of inter-state relations. Corr.: Does Ukraine's new president a chance to restore transit to the same extent? ED: This is a very complex question. You can try to get closer to its previous level when there is sufficient political will, both from Ukraine and from the Russian Federation. This year alone, Ukraine in terms of flow lost from 25 to 28 billion cubic meters of gas, the unfulfilled from Russia compared with the previous years. Potentially still a possibility is not something that restore and even increase the volume of transit through the modernization of the pipeline system up to 200 billion cubic meters, but this scenario seems unlikely any realistic. Readiness bypass projects, and particularly the Nord Stream, can not even hope that it will work on collapsed. As you know, February 12, Nord Stream was granted permission last of the five needed to start laying a gas pipeline under the Baltic Sea. Construction work will begin in April. Ukraine are waiting for hard times and revenue budget, of course, must be substantially in favor of diversified sources not related to the country of transit functions.